Monkey Man OWNS Speed Cameras
09-10-09, 06:47 AM
#17
Rookie
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no question of who the car belongs to, or where he lives. The point is that they are not allowed to fine him without absolute proof that it is actually him, and not someone using his car.
09-10-09, 06:55 AM
#19
Lexus Test Driver
09-10-09, 07:29 AM
#20
I am really interested in seeing where this goes. I watched a video of the story on the website of a Phoenix news station and police have said that they did do the surveillance. The news station interviewed the guy over the phone and he admitted to owning the masks but said others do drive his car on a regular basis. Mind you that the guy was on the phone driving to Texas during the interview. Ha ha!!
And they still wouldn't be able to pin the other 37 tickets on him.
09-10-09, 08:36 AM
#22
Lexus Test Driver
09-10-09, 03:45 PM
#24
Having the delight of my picture being taken by these same camera's (51 & Indian School), I researched the laws concerning this, and decided to ignore the ticket ($182 for 67 in a 55). The cameras are placed right after the speed limit drops from 65 on Hwy 51S.
A few facts about it in AZ:
You can pay it.
You can reply to it, stating you're not the driver and providing a photo copy of your drivers license, which is what the monkey/gazelle does.
You can ignore it. If you go this route and can avoid being served for 120 days from the infraction - you're in the clear. You'll get the first letter about 10 days from the infraction date. It will have the photo, what they recorded, the fine, and an explanation of your options to contest it. I ignored that letter. 60 days later, you get the second notice. Ignored that one,too. Between then and the 120 day point, they now have to serve you a court summons IN PERSON. This is the real issue, in my mind, with these cameras. There is no due process, which is all of our Constitutional right. When you get pulled by a cop and he hands you a ticket, you receive due process - not so with these cameras, at least not until the point where a process server hands you a court summons.
Arizona, last time i checked, has over 600 stop light and speeding cameras installed so far. They also have a large number of photo radar vans in use.
The cameras are owned by Red Flex, an Australian company, that receives ~$40 for each ticket the state gets paid on.
To date, I have that 1 infraction - so I'll go on record that I am not the monkey man
A few facts about it in AZ:
You can pay it.
You can reply to it, stating you're not the driver and providing a photo copy of your drivers license, which is what the monkey/gazelle does.
You can ignore it. If you go this route and can avoid being served for 120 days from the infraction - you're in the clear. You'll get the first letter about 10 days from the infraction date. It will have the photo, what they recorded, the fine, and an explanation of your options to contest it. I ignored that letter. 60 days later, you get the second notice. Ignored that one,too. Between then and the 120 day point, they now have to serve you a court summons IN PERSON. This is the real issue, in my mind, with these cameras. There is no due process, which is all of our Constitutional right. When you get pulled by a cop and he hands you a ticket, you receive due process - not so with these cameras, at least not until the point where a process server hands you a court summons.
Arizona, last time i checked, has over 600 stop light and speeding cameras installed so far. They also have a large number of photo radar vans in use.
The cameras are owned by Red Flex, an Australian company, that receives ~$40 for each ticket the state gets paid on.
To date, I have that 1 infraction - so I'll go on record that I am not the monkey man
09-11-09, 05:43 PM
#28
Lexus Champion
I'm glad someone is taking a stance against the cameras and wish him the best of luck.
Like someone posted, even if they did catch him once, they can't pin all the other tickets on him.
Like someone posted, even if they did catch him once, they can't pin all the other tickets on him.
09-11-09, 07:44 PM
#30
You are wrong. CA does not require anyone to identify who has been driving your vehicle in the event of a camera ticket.
http://www.highwayrobbery.net/
http://www.highwayrobbery.net/